Justice for some

BUCHAREST—Corruption scandals hit the headlines, but not the guilty EVERY man has his price; a minister's is just higher. Fixing a public tender in Romania may require a few euros. And some sausages. And maybe some plum brandy. Tapes from the prosecutor's office, leaked and then broadcast on television, show the farm minister, Decebal Traian Remes, apparently taking delivery via a middleman of €15,000 ($21,600), 20 kilos (44lb) of sausages and 100 litres (22 gallons) of plum brandy. He resigned and has made no statement. Romania's prime minister, Calin Popescu Tariceanu, criticised this “public execution” of his colleague.

Even if the tape shows what it seems to, Mr Remes is no more likely to end up behind bars than other figures under suspicion. These include even the justice minister, Tudor Chiuariu, whom prosecutors have tried to investigate, though he denies any wrongdoing. The government, using an emergency decree that avoids a parliamentary vote, has dissolved an advisory commission on lifting suspects' immunity. New amendments to the penal code prescribe jail sentences of up to seven years for journalists who publish material showing officials involved in bribe-taking, and also reduce the penalties for actual wrong-doing by raising the financial threshold for corruption charges. As for existing cases, including one involving a former prime minister, Adrian Nastase (who insists he is innocent), most are bogged down in procedural delays.

It was worries over high-level corruption and an ineffective judiciary that preoccupied the European Union in the period before Romania and Bulgaria joined, which they did in January. But since Romania squeezed in, its politicians and top officials have been busily trying to reclaim the privileges and immunities they were forced to give up during the accession negotiations.

The good work was mostly done by the then justice minister, Monica Macovei, backed by Romania's president, Traian Basescu. The EU encouraged her new teams of prosecutors, whose vigour and independence were in sharp contrast to the previous judicial system. They made useful inroads into the culture of corruption and impunity within the government. But since her sacking last April, Mr Chiuariu, her successor, has been less effective. He wants the prosecutor dealing with top politicians to be replaced.

The prosecutors (and Mr Basescu) disagree—so the government plans a constitutional amendment to limit presidential power.

Can the EU find new leverage to make up for what it lost when Romania achieved full membership? Worries about backsliding meant that Romania and Bulgaria were both subjected to a post-accession monitoring programme. Under this, the European Commission can stop Romanian court verdicts being binding elsewhere. That would be bad for business and citizens, and also shaming. But it may not be enough to sway the government.

Public outrage against corruption is still high, yet the bleak perception is that it flourishes. In the latest survey by Transparency International, a Berlin-based watchdog, Romania is rated the most corrupt country in the EU. Public opinion has yet to make itself felt on the issue. Optimists hope that a bad government will eventually exhaust voters' patience. Pessimists fear that the sight of a shamelessly corrupt new member may discredit the very notion of the EU's enlargement.

Copyright © 2007 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.